R v Johnson (No 2) [2019] NSWSC 144

R v Johnson (No 2) [2019] NSWSC 144

The evidence in MFI 1 regarding prior stabbings by the accused does not possess significant probative value as tendency evidence under s 97(1) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), due to its generality, differences in context, and significant lapse of time between events. It fails to rationally affect the probability of the accused’s mental element at the time of the charged offence to a significant extent, as required by binding precedent.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Ruling on Admissibility of Tendency Evidence Prior to Trial
Outcome
Evidence ruled inadmissible as tendency evidence under s 97(1) of Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
Legal Topics
['tendency Evidence' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'probative Value Vs Prejudicial Effect']
['evidence Law' 'criminal Law'] ['tendency Evidence' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'probative Value Vs Prejudicial Effect']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Ruling on Admissibility of Tendency Evidence Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether certain evidence is admissible as tendency evidence under s 97(1) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)' 'Whether the probative value of the tendency evidence substantially outweighs any prejudicial effect pursuant to s 101' 'Degree of specificity required for tendency evidence' 'Impact of extended time lapse between alleged tendency events']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence in MFI 1 regarding prior stabbings by the accused does not possess significant probative value as tendency evidence under s 97(1) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), due to its generality, differences in context, and significant lapse of time between events. It fails to rationally affect the probability of the accused’s mental element at the time of the charged offence to a significant extent, as required by binding precedent.

Court Disposition

Evidence ruled inadmissible as tendency evidence under s 97(1) of Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)

Orders

  • ['Under s192A, Evidence Act 1995, rule that the evidence contained in MFI 1 is not admissible under s 97(1) of the said Act.']